MINNEAPOLIS — Minnesota Timberwolves star Anthony Edwards will miss the start of any potential second-round series against the Oklahoma City Thunder due to a left knee hyperextension and bone bruise, raising serious questions about the team’s ability to reach the NBA Finals without its dynamic leading scorer. The injury, sustained in late April, has sidelined Edwards for critical playoff games, forcing the Timberwolves to rely on depth and veteran leadership as they navigate the postseason.

Edwards, one of the league’s most explosive guards, has been ruled week-to-week after an MRI confirmed no structural damage. Team officials and medical staff emphasize a cautious recovery to avoid setbacks, with the earliest possible return potentially in Games 3 or 4 of a Thunder series if Minnesota advances. The absence tests the Timberwolves’ resilience after strong regular-season performances and deep playoff runs in recent years.

Injury Details and Recovery Timeline

The Timberwolves announced Edwards’ diagnosis following imaging that revealed a hyperextension and bone bruise. He has avoided ligament tears, a positive sign, but bone bruises can linger and require careful management. Edwards has begun light on-court work, including movement drills and shooting, but has not progressed to full-contact activities or scrimmages.

Coach Chris Finch and the medical team are monitoring daily progress. Insiders describe the recovery as a “slow build,” with no firm return date. Edwards’ presence around the team for meetings and morale has been valuable, but his on-court absence creates a significant void in scoring, playmaking and athleticism.

The injury occurred during a high-stakes stretch, leaving Minnesota to adjust lineups and strategies mid-playoffs. Edwards’ scoring average and defensive versatility make him irreplaceable in crunch time, particularly against elite Western Conference opponents like the Thunder.

Timberwolves’ Performance Without Edwards

Minnesota has shown flashes of competitiveness without its star. The team has a respectable win percentage in games Edwards has missed during his career, relying on Rudy Gobert’s interior dominance, Karl-Anthony Towns’ (or current frontcourt) spacing and role players stepping up. Recent stretches without Edwards demonstrated improved ball movement and defensive intensity.

However, playoffs amplify the impact of star absences. The Timberwolves’ offense loses explosiveness and creation ability, forcing heavier reliance on half-court sets and opponent scouting. Defensively, Edwards’ perimeter pressure and help defense are missed against guards like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander.

Veterans and younger contributors have filled gaps, but sustaining that level deep into May remains a challenge. The team’s depth, built through smart drafting and trades, provides a buffer but may not fully compensate for Edwards’ All-Star production over a long series.

Path to the NBA Finals Without Their Star

Reaching the Finals without Edwards would require near-perfect execution and favorable matchups. The Western Conference remains stacked, with Oklahoma City posing a particular threat due to youth, depth and regular-season dominance over Minnesota. The Thunder’s switchable defense and transition game could exploit Minnesota’s temporary lack of perimeter firepower.

If the Timberwolves advance past their first-round opponent, a series against OKC would test their ceiling. Historical precedents show teams occasionally overcoming star injuries through chemistry and role-player heroics, but the margin for error shrinks dramatically in the postseason.

Edwards’ potential mid-series return could shift momentum, providing a spark similar to past comeback stories. The organization remains optimistic about his availability later in the round if the series extends, but nothing is guaranteed. Medical clearance will depend on pain-free movement and functional testing.

Broader Implications for Minnesota’s Season

The Timberwolves entered the playoffs with high expectations after consistent improvement. Edwards’ emergence as a franchise cornerstone fueled championship aspirations. His injury adds urgency to supporting-cast performance and coaching adjustments.

Finch has emphasized adaptability, rotating lineups and maintaining defensive identity. Gobert anchors the paint, while guards and wings must increase scoring loads. The front office’s roster construction, balancing veterans and youth, is being tested in real time.

A deep run without Edwards would boost confidence and validate the core’s strength. Conversely, an early exit could prompt offseason questions about roster tweaks or health management protocols.

Fan and League Reactions

Timberwolves fans express disappointment mixed with resilience, rallying behind the slogan of “next man up.” Social media buzzes with support for Edwards’ recovery and calls for collective effort. League-wide, the injury highlights the physical toll of the playoff grind and importance of depth.

Rivals and analysts note Minnesota’s toughness but question sustainability against elite competition. Edwards’ absence removes a major X-factor, shifting series narratives and betting odds.

Edwards’ Long-Term Outlook

At 24, Edwards remains in his prime with superstar potential. The injury, while serious, appears manageable with no structural damage reported. Proper rehab should allow a full return next season, potentially stronger with added experience.

The situation underscores the need for load management and injury prevention in today’s NBA. Edwards’ handling of the setback, focusing on recovery and team support, reflects maturity beyond his years.

What’s Next for Timberwolves and Edwards

Minnesota concentrates on advancing while providing Edwards every resource for recovery. Daily updates will track his progress toward on-court activities. If the team reaches the Thunder series, Game 1 without Edwards looms as a significant test.

The Western Conference remains unforgiving. Success without Edwards would rank among the season’s most impressive achievements, showcasing depth and coaching. Edwards’ eventual return could fuel a memorable playoff push.

As the postseason intensifies, the Timberwolves’ ability to compete shorthanded will define their identity. Fans and analysts watch closely, hoping for a resilient run and Edwards’ timely comeback in pursuit of NBA Finals glory.

After months of touring South Florida’s most fortified islands and branded penthouses, the final stop on the “billionaire bunker” circuit reveals a shift in the ultra-high-net-worth psyche.

Wealthy transplants are no longer just buying security – they are buying history. Tucked behind the lush, designer landscaping of a Gothic-modern $18 million estate, the “Silicon Grove” era has arrived. Here, the bunker isn’t a modern glass box, but instead features grand spaces, hand-carved stone fixtures and even a giant chessboard on the roof that feels more like a European cathedral than a Miami residence.

As taxes scream in the Northeast and West Coast, titans of industry are finding that true luxury in 2026 means a private dock, keystone-edged infinity pool and the freedom to walk to a local bookstore without a security detail in tow — including Google co-founder Larry Page, who just poured more than $188 million into the neighborhood.

“People of that caliber do their homework before they purchase anything. Regardless how emotional or how impulsive it is, they always are guided and they’re taught where to buy or where not to buy, and their advisors told them that Coconut Grove was the place,” Douglas Elliman’s Lourdes Alatriste, who has a long roster of A-list clients, told Fox News Digital.

INSIDE THE 50-HOME MIAMI SANCTUARY WHERE SMART MONEY IS BUYING DECADES OF SECURITY FOR THEIR KIDS

“And that just makes it everything that I’ve always said: Coconut Grove is a hidden gem. It has everything… from water, to walks, to parks, to stores, to family.”

Homes in the Coconut Grove neighborhood of Miami, Florida, on Monday, March 23, 2026. (Getty Images)

Coconut Grove is Miami-Dade County’s oldest neighborhood, having been founded by settlers in the 1870s and annexed by Miami in 1925. Its ascent began in the 1960s when it was dubbed as “The Grove,” and attracted largely Bohemian artists, musicians and writers. During the 1980s, money started flowing due to the height of America’s cocaine boom, and while Coconut Grove maintained some of its hippie vibe, new residential developments took over the landscape.

Fast-forward to today, and “all of a sudden, it started picking up again because [people] noticed, when you have a place, when there’s no more land, and you have a location that fills all your desires as to schools, as to parks, as to shops, as to lifestyle, privacy, you go for it. You start building it up,” Alatriste explained. “You take the areas that are great and make them even better.”

The home the luxury agent showed to Fox News Digital paralleled the community’s mix of history and new age extravagance. Upon entering, a great hall hits you with 30-foot vaulted ceilings and glossy marble floors that hum with a cool, heavy permanence. Massive, smooth-plastered white fireplaces act as anchors, while antique stained-glass windows — positioned high like clerestories — cast colorful, geometric shadows across modern white bouclé armchairs and French cast bronze chandeliers.

According to Alatriste, the home’s asking price of $18.9 million is actually “a little bit under” expectations.

“When I give prices, there’s always three prices for me: A wow factor… Then there [are] the regular prices comparable with the comps in the area, and there’s the price I have to sell tomorrow. So, with that said, I think Coconut Grove has maintained its wow factor,” she said.

“You have an opportunity now that I don’t know if you’ll have it later on. As [prices rise] and as more people come in, because we still have a lot of people, and remember, Florida doesn’t just have a certain [migration demographic], like New Yorkers or California, they have everything. They have Mexico. They have Brazil… Chicago… It’s a melting pot of different states and countries that come here.”

While Indian Creek Village, Four Seasons Surf Club and Allison Island rely on private security forces, the Grove relies on a culture of “respectful distance.” The homes are designed to allow high-profile owners to engage with the world on their terms, featuring outdoor spaces that look out without being seen.

Some of the most notable residents have included Madonna, LeBron James, Sylvester Stallone, Jimmy Buffett, Derek Jeter, Christian Slater — and for history’s sake, telephone inventor Alexander Graham Bell.

“You want to go to dinner, come back and not [have] fear or anything. You want to go on a trip and want to know that your area is being covered, that you don’t have to worry. There’s always going to be something that we can’t control, but basically, people that live around you will always take care of you as well,” Alatriste said of the sense of community in Coconut Grove. “They’re not star-crazy… they’re very respectful of others.”

For tech titans like Page and other forces of industry, the draw to Florida has allegedly shifted to a lifestyle change as opposed to being strictly about business.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

“I think they’ll always talk about taxes. Money screams,” Alatriste said. “But of course at that caliber, your lifestyle is more important than the money.”

“Wellness, authenticity and community… Those are the three words to best describe Coconut Grove.”

READ MORE FROM FOX BUSINESS

Edited excerpts from a chat:

Given that most IT majors have given weaker than expected guidance for FY27, how has your outlook on IT stocks changed after the Q4 results?

FY27 guidance indicates revenue growth will remain at the modest level recorded in FY26, which we regard as disappointing. The shortfall reflects client‑specific challenges rather than any incremental sector‑wide weakness. That said, client spending, which began to improve early in the year, appears to have stalled because of the Middle‑East conflict and its likely macro‑economic repercussions.

What signs are you reading from the management commentary around the impact of AI on tech spending and order books?

We see a wide growth divergence that is starting to emerge among the companies who are getting disrupted from AI and those who are better positioned in this transition. Although investors fear incremental pricing pressure on IT‑services firms, most companies noted no new price compression or delay in large deals signing since the launch of the latest frontier‑model versions and plugins in January. The sector’s pricing pressure stems chiefly from aggressive vendor‑consolidation pricing, not from AI itself, and the order book does not fully capture the revenue leakage caused by such consolidation.

Live Events

You argued in your report last month that the risk-reward balance is turning favourable even in the most bearish scenario. We have noticed that pace of selling has been on a decreasing trend after the February sell-off in which the IT index fell nearly 20%. Do you think we are on a recovery path in FY27?

If the Middle‑East conflict de‑escalates soon, we expect the improving macro‑economic backdrop to lift growth at IT‑services firms. Nevertheless, we expect revenue‑growth recovery to be gradual over the next few quarters, as AI’s deflationary effect continues while demand from a healthier macro environment and AI‑related services takes longer to materialise. We therefore recommend a selective approach, favouring companies less exposed to AI disruption and those poised to benefit from AI adoption.

While there is hardly any doubt that AI means a structural shift on how we look at technology, what makes you think that it won’t be a structural breakdown in Indian IT services model?

We are convinced that AI will not upend the Indian IT‑services companies’ business model: for three key reasons:

a) Enterprises are unlikely to surrender pricing power and technology ownership by consolidating their entire tech stack with a handful of frontier‑model providers.

b) Frontier‑model firms lack the capacity to support and customise solutions for thousands of enterprise clients, and

c) A core value proposition of IT‑services firms is their assumption of implementation and management risk; this role remains essential regardless of whether applications originate from software/SaaS vendors or frontier‑model providers.

Is it time for long-term investors to start thinking of large-cap IT stocks as value stocks?

We consider it risky to label any large‑cap IT stock as a “value” investment while disruption persists and earnings‑growth risk remains elevated. Large‑cap IT firms possess diverse capabilities, and AI will affect them unevenly. Some large‑cap services exhibit an unfavourable revenue mix, making them unattractive despite an appealing dividend yield.

Do you think that buybacks and dividends will restrict the downfall in case market sentiment turns more bitter?

For companies that possess strong AI capabilities but are struggling with modest near‑term growth, buybacks and dividends act as effective downside buffers. Robust free‑cash‑flow generation and high payout ratios enable these firms to sustain a strong total‑shareholder‑return profile even in a more adverse market environment.

According to Jefferies’ Christopher Wood, global head of equity strategy, the scale of spending by US hyperscalers has reached a point where it is consuming an increasingly large share of their cash flows, particularly on chips and memory. Based on the latest company guidance, capex as a percentage of operating cash flow for the four major US hyperscalers has surged from 41% in 2023 to a projected 92% in 2026.

A significant portion of this is being directed towards memory alone, which is estimated to account for about 30% of total capex, implying roughly 28% of operating cash flow being absorbed by memory investments this year, he said in his Greed and Fear report.

This rising intensity of investment brings into focus a more fundamental question: monetisation. A recent Jefferies report led by Edison Lee highlights that the challenges around AI business models remain underestimated. The increasing cost of staying competitive, driven by higher compute, memory, and power requirements, suggests that sustainable profitability for pure AI model players remains distant.

Wood aligns with this view. His base case is that AI may ultimately resemble a capital-intensive industry like airlines, rather than the high-margin, winner-takes-all dynamics seen in the internet era.

Live Events

Even so, the current phase of spending shows little sign of slowing. Big Tech companies continue to push ahead with aggressive capex plans. Microsoft expects to spend $190 billion this year, including about $25 billion attributed to higher component costs. Alphabet and Meta have both raised their 2026 capex guidance to $180–190 billion and $125–145 billion, respectively, while Amazon has maintained its guidance at $200 billion.
Among these, investor concerns appear more pronounced in the case of Meta, which lacks the same direct cloud-driven benefits from AI spending as peers like Alphabet, Microsoft, and Amazon.For now, the “picks and shovels” trade remains intact, supported by continued spending and limited pushback from investors on returns.

However, early signs of strain are beginning to surface. A recent report noted that OpenAI has missed internal targets for both user growth and revenues, including a goal of reaching 1 billion weekly active users for ChatGPT by the end of last year. The company has also reportedly fallen short of multiple monthly revenue targets in 2026, while facing increased competition.

Market share trends reflect this shift. Over the past 12 months to March, Gemini’s share of web traffic in the generative AI market has risen sharply from 6% to 25.5%, while ChatGPT’s share has declined from 77.4% to 56.7%, according to SimilarWeb data.

At the same time, concerns have been raised about financing structures within the ecosystem, where partners such as Nvidia and Oracle provide funding to OpenAI, which in turn uses that capital to purchase compute from them.

Competition is also intensifying. Anthropic reported in early April that its annualised revenue run rate has exceeded $30 billion, up from around $9 billion at the end of 2025, now surpassing OpenAI’s reported run rate of over $25 billion in February.

Taken together, the picture that emerges is one of escalating investment, rising competitive pressure, and unresolved questions around returns. The spending cycle continues, but the strain it places on cash flows and the uncertainty around monetisation are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)

The index oscillated within a defined band of 587.85 points, reflecting a lack of strong directional conviction. Volatility edged higher; the India VIX declined by 6.35% to 18.46, indicating some decline in hedging activity despite the range-bound move.

The Nifty ended the week with a modest gain of 99.60 points (+0.42%).

ETMarkets.com

From a structural standpoint, the Nifty continues to remain in a broad consolidation zone, with prices hovering near the lower half of its intermediate range. The index is currently dealing with an important zone around the 23,900–24,000 area, which is acting as an immediate equilibrium level.

Live Events

While the broader trend remains sideways, the recent pullback followed by stabilization suggests an attempt to form a near-term base. A sustained move above the upper boundary of the recent range could revive directional momentum, while a breach below the recent swing lows would reintroduce corrective pressure. Until a breakout occurs, the index is likely to remain range-bound with intermittent volatility spikes.
For the coming week, markets may see a stable-to-cautious start, given the modest gains and rising volatility. Immediate resistance levels are placed at 24,350 and 24,550, while supports come in at 23,900 and 23,500. These levels are likely to define the near-term trading band.
The weekly RSI stands at 44.16, remaining neutral and showing no visible divergence against price. It is neither oversold nor showing strength, reinforcing the ongoing consolidation theme. The weekly MACD remains below its signal line, with the histogram still in negative territory, indicating that the broader momentum remains weak, though the rate of decline appears to be moderating.
The formation of a small-bodied candle with a lower shadow suggests some buying support emerging at lower levels, hinting at potential stabilization.

Pattern analysis of the weekly chart indicates that the Nifty continues to trade within a large rectangular consolidation pattern, broadly placed between 22,400 and 25,000. Prices are also hovering around key moving averages, with the 100-week MA acting as resistance.

The inability to decisively move above the 100-week MA keeps the upside capped for now, while the long-term trend remains intact above the 200-week MA.

Given the current setup, the advisable approach would be to remain selective and cautious. Aggressive directional bets may not be ideal unless a confirmed breakout occurs. Traders should focus on stock-specific opportunities while maintaining strict risk management. It would be prudent to protect existing gains and avoid over-leveraging, as the market continues to oscillate within a defined range.

The coming week should be approached with a balanced, reactive strategy rather than a predictive one.

In our look at Relative Rotation Graphs®, we compared various sectors against the CNX500 (NIFTY 500 Index), representing over 95% of the free-float market cap of all the listed stocks.

ETMarkets.com

The Relative Rotation Graph (RRG) shows that the Nifty Media Index has rolled inside the leading quadrant. Along with this, the Pharma, PSE, Metal, Infrastructure, Midcap 100, and Energy Sector Indices are also inside this quadrant.

ETMarkets.com

These groups are likely to relatively outperform the broader markets. The Nifty PSU Bank Index continues to stay inside the weakening quadrant. This is likely to see a continued slowdown in the sector’s relative performance.

The Nifty Bank, Auto, and Financial Services Index has rolled inside the weakening quadrant. Along with the Nifty Services Sector Index, these groups are set to relatively underperform the broader markets.

The IT Index is also inside the lagging quadrant; however, it is seen as improving its relative momentum. The Realty Index has rolled inside the improving quadrant. The FMCG Index is also inside this quadrant.

Important Note: RRG™ charts show the relative strength and momentum of a group of stocks. In the above Chart, they show relative performance against the NIFTY500 Index (Broader Markets) and should not be used directly as buy or sell signals.

(The author is Milan Vaishnav, CMT, MSTA Consulting Technical Analyst Member. Views are own.)

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views, and opinions given by experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times)

NEW YORK — Samsung’s Galaxy Z Fold series continues dominating the foldable smartphone market in 2026, leaving potential buyers weighing whether to purchase the latest Z Fold 8 now or hold out for Apple’s long-rumored foldable iPhone expected later this year. The decision hinges on immediate needs versus anticipation of Apple’s ecosystem integration and premium build quality in its first book-style foldable device.

Samsung’s latest foldables offer refined designs, powerful performance and established software optimizations, making them attractive for users seeking productivity and multitasking today. Apple’s entry, potentially dubbed iPhone Fold or iPhone Ultra, promises seamless iOS integration and innovative features but remains months away with possible supply constraints.

Current Galaxy Z Fold Advantages

Samsung’s Z Fold 8 builds on years of iteration, delivering a mature product with minimal creases, durable hinges and versatile use cases. The inner display provides tablet-like productivity for split-screen apps, note-taking and media consumption, while the cover screen handles quick tasks like a traditional phone.

Performance shines with flagship Snapdragon processors, ample RAM and excellent cameras. Battery life improved through efficiency gains, though heavy multitasking still drains power faster than slab phones. Software features like Flex Mode enhance the foldable experience for video calls and content creation.

Pricing remains premium but competitive within the category, with trade-in programs and carrier deals easing the cost. Samsung’s ecosystem, including Galaxy Watch and Buds integration, appeals to Android users seeking seamless connectivity.

Early adopters praise the device’s ability to replace both phone and tablet for many users. Drawbacks include weight, durability concerns over repeated folding and higher price compared to standard flagships.

Apple’s Foldable Plans Generate Buzz

Rumors suggest Apple’s foldable iPhone could launch in September 2026 alongside Pro models, featuring a wider design for better ergonomics and a near-crease-free display. Expected specs include a large inner screen, powerful A-series chip and premium materials aligning with iPhone standards.

The device would bring Apple’s polish to foldables, with optimized iOS for the form factor, exceptional build quality and tight integration with Mac, iPad and other devices. Camera systems, battery life and software features could set new benchmarks if leaks prove accurate.

Potential downsides include high pricing potentially exceeding $2,000, limited initial supply and the risk of first-generation issues common in new categories. Apple’s history of entering markets late but excelling through refinement suggests a strong contender, but buyers must wait.

Key Comparison Factors

Design and Build: Samsung offers tried-and-tested book-style folding with incremental improvements. Apple’s rumored wider aspect ratio could feel more natural for media and productivity, potentially reducing the “phone when folded” compromise.

Software Experience: Android on Z Fold provides immediate customization and app optimization for foldables. iOS on Apple’s device would offer unmatched fluidity and privacy features, but developers may need time to fully adapt apps.

Performance and Features: Both promise flagship power, but Samsung’s current models deliver today with excellent multitasking. Apple’s silicon excels in efficiency and AI capabilities, potentially offering superior battery life and camera processing.

Ecosystem Integration: Android users benefit from Samsung’s Galaxy ecosystem. Apple devotees gain from seamless continuity across devices, making the foldable a natural extension of existing setups.

Price and Value: Z Fold models command premium prices but include trade-ins and promotions. Apple’s entry could exceed expectations, targeting luxury buyers willing to pay for brand and refinement.

Availability and Reliability: Samsung provides immediate access with proven track records. Apple’s first foldable may face production delays common in new categories, though the company typically prioritizes quality.

Who Should Buy Galaxy Z Fold Now

Tech enthusiasts wanting foldable benefits immediately should consider the Z Fold 8. Professionals needing multitasking for work, students for note-taking or media consumers for larger screens benefit from current options. Android users deeply invested in Google’s ecosystem find strong value.

Those prioritizing innovation and willing to wait may hold for Apple. iPhone loyalists expecting ecosystem synergy or users seeking premium refinement could find the wait worthwhile. Budget-conscious buyers might explore mid-cycle deals on previous Z Fold generations.

Market Trends in Foldables

Foldables represent the fastest-growing premium segment, with shipments increasing yearly. Samsung maintains leadership through iteration, but Apple’s entry could expand the category significantly by attracting mainstream users.

Competition from Chinese brands like Huawei and Honor pushes innovation in hinges, displays and software. Durability improvements and crease reduction address early criticisms, broadening appeal.

Pricing remains a barrier for mass adoption, though trade-ins and financing options help. As technology matures, costs may decrease, accelerating growth.

Final Recommendation Considerations

The choice depends on timeline, ecosystem preference and risk tolerance. Buying Samsung provides immediate utility with minimal first-gen risks. Waiting for Apple offers potential for superior integration but requires patience and possible initial supply limits.

Evaluate current needs against future desires. Test devices in-store to experience the form factor. Consider total cost of ownership, including accessories and potential trade-ins.

Tech evolves rapidly, so neither choice locks users out of future upgrades. Both Samsung and Apple drive innovation benefiting consumers through competition.

As 2026 progresses, more details on Apple’s foldable will emerge, potentially influencing decisions. For now, Galaxy Z Fold delivers proven foldable excellence while Apple builds anticipation for its debut.